Edith Cowan University
Research Online
School of Psychology and Social Science
Presentations School of Psychology and Social Science
2012
Visual Memory Improvement in Recognition
Allison Prandl
Edith Cowan University
Supervisors: Dr Ken Robinson and Dr Ricks Allan This Presentation is posted at Research Online.
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/spsyc_pres/9
Visual memory improvement in recognition
Allison Prandl
School of Social Science and Psychology, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western
Australia
Rationale
• In 2008 Jaeggi and her colleagues demonstrated that fluid intelligence could be improved by training on a visual working memory n-back task.
• While improvement on a simple working memory test was noted, no improvement in working memory capacity was found.
• Preece (2011) and Palmer (2011) found that n-back training did not improve fluid intelligence. Furthermore Palmer (2011) found that training on a general knowledge/vocabulary task did improve fluid intelligence.
Purpose of this study
• To investigate whether n-back training can increase visual recognition memory.
Hypothesis
• After training using the single n-back task, participants’ scores on a test of visual recognition memory will be significantly higher in comparison to participants who undergo general knowledge/vocabulary training.
Method
• Mixed factorial design
• Between-subjects factor - 2 levels (single n-back task and combined general knowledge/vocabulary task)
• Within-subjects factor - 2 levels (pre-training and post-training)
• Dependent variable - raw test scores of Test 13, Picture Recognition (WJ III)
• Initial testing
• 20 days of training over a 30 day period
• Final testing phase
Participants
• 47 participants in total completed the training task
• 21 participants in the active control group
• 26 participants in the experimental group
• Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 68 (M = 35.91) in the n-back group, and (M
= 40.44) in the active control group.
Materials
• Test 13, Picture Recognition of the Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Cognitive Abilities (2001) (Fig 1)
• Experimental group - n-back training task software obtained from
Brainworkshop (n.d) and modified to replicate the software used by Jaeggi et al.
(2008) (Fig 2)
• Active control goup - Definetime, vocabulary task accessed via the East of the Web (n.d.) website and Who Wants to be a Millionaire accessed via the Real Player Games (n.d.) website (Fig 3)
Results
• Interaction between the training group and pre-post Test 13 scores was non-significant indicating that type of training did not have an influence over improvement in visual recognition memory scores, SPANOVA F(1,42) = .016, p = .899, partial η2 < .001.
• Overall participants significantly improved in their Test 13 scores from pre- to post-test SPANOVA F(1, 42) = 15.515, p
= < .001, partial η2 = .270.
Follow-up Interviews
• Participants spoke about how motivating they found the Definetime task.
• Participants spontaneously described how they used shape recognition strategies to obtain high scores (Fig 1).
Figure 1. Example of shapes used by participants for recognition.
Active control groups
• Definetime - those who were higher scorers in Definetime had a significantly higher gain in Test 13 scores than those in the lower gain group, one-way between groups ANOVA F(1,19) = 6.864, p = .017, η2 = .265. This suggests that high Definetime scorers increased their visual recognition memory in comparison to low Definetime scorers.
• Who wants to be a Millionaire - there was no significant difference in gain in Test 13 scores between the low and high Who Wants to be a Millionaire scoring groups, one-way between groups ANOVA F(1,19) = .811, p = .379, η2 = .041.
This suggests that there was no difference in visual recognition memory improvement between the low and high Who Wants to be a Millionaire scorers . Experimental group
N-back – there was no significant difference in gain in Test 13 scores between the low and high n-back scoring groups, one-way between groups ANOVA F(1,23) = .879, p = .358, η2 = .037 (Fig 6). This suggests that there was no difference in visual recognition memory improvement between the low scoring n- back group and the high scoring n-back group.
Table 1. Means and standard deviations of Test 13 gain in low and high performing groups.
Low High
________________________________________________________________
Training
Group M SD M SD
________________________________________________________________
Definetime 0.40 1.71 2.18 1.40
Millionaire 1.70 2.11 1.00 1.41
N-back 0.46 2.47 1.25 1.60
________________________________________________________________
Conclusion
• Training using the single n-back task does not significantly increase visual recognition memory scores when
compared with general knowledge/vocabulary training.
• Participants who obtain high scores in Definetime
improve their visual recognition scores significantly more than participants who have low scores in Definetime.
• Participants who have high scores in Definetime use shape recognition strategies.
Questions for further research
• Is visual recognition memory improved through training?
• Is Definetime a better visual recognition training task than n-back training?
• Is the n-back task in the single n-back form a visual recognition training task?
• Is Definetime a visual recognition training task?
• Was Jaeggi (2008) incorrect to conclude that n-back training can improve fluid intelligence?
• Do motivational factors affect performance on cognitive training tasks?
• Is visual recognition the driving influence behind the fluid intelligence gains demonstrated by Jaeggi (2008), Preece (2011) and Palmer (2011)?
References
Brainworkshop. (n.d.). A dual n-back game. Retrieved from http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/download.html
East of the Web. (n.d.). Definetime [Adobe Flash Player game]. Retrieved from http://www.eastoftheweb.com/games/Definetime1.html
Jaeggi, M., Buschkuehl, M., Jonides, J., & Perrig, W. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(19), 6829–6833. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0801268105 Palmer, V. (2011) Improving fluid intelligence (Gf) though training. (Honours thesis,
Edith Cowan University, Perth Australia).
Preece, D. (2011) The effect of working memory (n-back) training on fluid intelligence.
(Honours thesis, Edith Cowan University, Perth Australia).
Real Player Games Directory.. (n.d.)Who wants to be a millionaire [Adobe Flash Player game]. Retrieved from http://www.box10.com/who-wants-to-be-a-
millionaire.html
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca IL: Riverside Publishing
